Re: Re: assertEquals("NaN", x, y, 0.0) where x=y=Double.NaN

The way things currently work is the way the double class works. 
This 'patch' would seem to violate the basic contract of double.

Does assertEquals return true when both objects are null?

I don't know your procedure for deciding on changes or fixes. Is there
some way to discuss and determine whether or not this fix is proper or
that the current behavior is better?

On Sat, 22 Jun 2002 21:13:08 -0000 "kentlbeck" <kentbeck@xxxxxxx> writes:
> --- In junit@xxxx, "Morten Grum, PH-Consult" <mg@xxxx> wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > x and y are both simple double.
> > 
> > Oughtn't assertEquals("x and y", x, y, 0.0) succeed when both x 
> and 
> y are
> > Double.NaN?
> 
> Can you submit a patch to sourceforge that contains a test for the 
> behavior you're looking for?
> 
> Kent
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> junit-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
> 

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.